I was very disappointed with this work but I've seen the same sort of thing in other writing. Bomhard cannot single-handedly rehabilitate Gimbutas just by adding a section that adopts her position in a four-volume work. Her hypotheses fail to explain why Hesiod's Theogony so closely resembles a Hurrian epic known only from Hittite cuneiform -- a script that the Greeks never read and a work their ancestors would not have pulled out of the rubble of Hattusas after destroying it. A reference to Noldeke can no longer be taken seriously given 21st century genetic results on Semitic peoples. Calling Arabic a western-Semitic language runs into research by Rendsburg, Rabin and Huehnergard and the fact that Arabic resembles Old Akkadian and proto-Semitic more closely than it does Ugaritic, both in grammar and vocabulary. Bomhard pretends he relies on morphology but really, he's a philologist instead of a grammarian and like most philologists, he looks at form not function. This book is not available on Amazon or anywhere else as far as I can find; Bomhard's former publisher Brill did not pick it up. The real 21st century work on comparative linguistics remains to be done until somebody undertakes the work who is not blinded by the light or swamped by the research.